Microsoft Doubtful of Win XP's Netbook Future

Status
Not open for further replies.

krazyderek

Distinguished
Feb 5, 2006
68
0
18,630
0
read: stop buying our old refined product we don't make as much money off of and buy the new version that has worse battery life and many many service packs to come.
 

BrentonMcGhee

Distinguished
Aug 27, 2009
18
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]krazyderek[/nom]read: stop buying our old refined product we don't make as much money off of and buy the new version that has worse battery life and many many service packs to come.[/citation]

read: I will and will always be an XP user completely ignoring all of the benefits that 7 has to offer.
 
[citation][nom]__-_-_-__[/nom]I still use xp x64. stable and compatible as hell. even got directx11 on it."benefits that 7 has to offer" woot? lol![/citation]

You give 64 bit windows xp 2gb of ram and its ok, you give it 8gb and... its still the same as if you had 2gb - on the other hand if you feed vista or 7 the 8gb it owns, the more you give it, the quicker it gets.

How about trying it one day? you will never go back.
 

cscott_it

Distinguished
Jul 30, 2009
474
0
18,810
7
[citation][nom]__-_-_-__[/nom]I still use xp x64. stable and compatible as hell. even got directx11 on it."benefits that 7 has to offer" woot? lol![/citation]

x64 XP was crap. I should know, I had a cherry system and suffered with a bug ridden poorly designed OS. XP was fine, but XP 64 gave me quite a few problems.

I mean, X1900XT in crossfire, FX-55 (then later a FX-60 last tribute of 939), 4GB of ram. I much prefered my system on Vista x64.
 

doc70

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2009
325
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]deadlockedworld[/nom]why cant MS make a light version of windows? Apple runs a modified OS X on iphones... so it only seems natural that microsoft could make a netbook capable windows..[/citation]

There is a Windows for phones, it's called Windows Mobile, and it does multitasking among other things, unlike the iDon't.
If you are implying that the iPhone is a netbook... well, just look at the specs and capabilities of the OS and draw your own conclusion.

I have XP, Vista and Win7 on my PCs and I have to admit that Win7 is excellent so far. When I use it I don't miss XP a bit.
 

thedipper

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2009
97
0
18,630
0
Wait, XP's UI being bloat free? Memory wise, sure, but that UI is horribly inefficient in terms of actual use.

To the guy claiming to have DX11 on XP, it's not possible to have over DX9 on XP. Yes, I've read up on the little hacking scheme, no they did not successfully do anything other than enabling winXP to run DX10+ on XP - which can still run in DX9.
 

matt87_50

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2009
1,150
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]deadlockedworld[/nom]why cant MS make a light version of windows? Apple runs a modified OS X on iphones... so it only seems natural that microsoft could make a netbook capable windows..[/citation]

god, Apple won't even make a netbook.

again, how were these battery tests when they turned the 3d desktop off???

either way, I think you'll find XP is more of a resource hog than 95.

its not microsoft's fault that laptop manufactures decided to make antiquated laptops and then sell them as current gen.
 

aspireonelover

Distinguished
Jun 16, 2009
109
0
18,680
0
Microsoft is doubtful about windows xp.... We're doubtful that microsoft's even making the right decision of putting windows 7 home premium on netbooks :p (just my thought)
 

Yoder54

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2008
398
0
18,810
11
[citation][nom]__-_-_-__[/nom]I still use xp x64. stable and compatible as hell. even got directx11 on it."benefits that 7 has to offer" woot? lol![/citation]

Well, I did an upgrade to Win7 to get the 64-bit version and have benefited a lot from it! I like what I see so far, and enjoy the shit out of the 64-bit architecture.

For those still running 32-bit Windows, then 64-bit Windows 7 is a MUST GET upgrade (assuming all is well with the hardware.) In fact, you would be a fool not to.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Windows 7 is alright, although TBH, it doesn't exactly blow me away... Atleast UAC isn't nearly as bad as it was in Vista...
 

maigo

Distinguished
Apr 8, 2009
552
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]thedipper[/nom]Wait, XP's UI being bloat free? Memory wise, sure, but that UI is horribly inefficient in terms of actual use.[/citation]
Not free UI bloat, no, only but half as much as Vista/7
 

liquidsnake718

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2009
1,379
0
19,310
5
Wow resist change... those are words are straight out of Terminator. Haha I wouldnt be surprised if Microsoft did forced us users into an OS that gives them all of our info and internet habits, which im sure is pretty common in Windows 7.
 

intesx

Distinguished
Aug 9, 2009
22
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]maigo[/nom]XP is less UI bloat. I hate UI bloat.[/citation]

8 years ago people like you were saying that about 2000 and XP. They converted eventually and they're the same ones today that are struggling to hold on to XP.

There is nothing bloated about Aero these days... even throw away computers can run Aero without breaking a sweat.
 
Regardless of the device that is using XP, i.e. netbook, laptop, PC, etc..., W7 should indeed be the main product marketed and used from here on out. Thanks to Vista, XP held on longer than expected market wise. I'm all for change, i.e. new things. Sure, XP has its pluses in terms of simplicity and compatibility for older programs, but eventually we have to move on. To be honest I was never a fan of XP- too simplistic. I ditched XP the second Vista came out in beta and haven't used it since.
 

False_Dmitry_II

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2009
1,944
0
19,960
57
If I got a netbook with windows 7 on it, I'd not activate it, steal the key. Use the key on a computer (like my gaming desktop) that would benefit more from it, and put XP (or ubuntu) on the netbook.

Far better use of what's provided.
 

kozmo403

Distinguished
May 17, 2009
10
0
18,510
0
This debate will go on and on but why can't we just let XP die with dignity. It was, WAS a great OS. It IS currently riddled with security holes that are being patched constantly. Windows Vista had fewer security issues while introducing a much improved UI (sorry, XP's start menu blows and tools that should have been included are not [TweakUI for one]). Windows 7's "bloated UI" is much more manageable than than XP's ever was.

If you don't want to switch don't. But stop complaining about change. It's going to happen whether you like it or not. Be prepared for it or lag behind.

And I expect this to be voted down about a gazillion times. So do your worst.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS